* WGs marked with an * asterisk has had at least one new draft made available during the last 5 days

6man Status Pages

IPv6 Maintenance (Active WG)
Int Area: Suresh Krishnan, Terry Manderson | 2007-Sep-25 —  
Chairs
 
 


IETF-101 6man minutes

Session 2018-03-19 1330-1530: Viscount - Audio stream - 6man chatroom

Minutes

minutes-101-6man-00 minutes



          6MAN Working Group - London IETF Meeting
          Monday, 19 March 2018, 13:30-15:30, 1W Viscount
          
          Chairs: Bob Hinden, Ole Troan
          
          Minute taker: Jordi Palet, Eric Vyncke
          Jabber Scribe: Mikael Abrahamsson
          
          Jabber Room: 6man@jabber.ietf.org
          Meetecho: https://www.meetecho.com/ietf101/6man
          
          -----------------------------------------------------------------------
          -----------------------------------------------------------------------
          
          Agenda
          
          Introduction, Agenda Bashing, Document Status, Chairs, 10 min.
          
          Working Group Drafts
          
          IPv6 Node Requirements, draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis , Tim Chown, Tim
          Winters, 20 min.
          
          IPv6 Segment Routing Header (SRH) draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header
          , Darren Dukes, 20 min.
          
          Multi-Vendor Interoperability Testing Results Update, Carsten
          Rossenhövel, 5 min.
          
          Active Individual Drafts
          
          ICMPv6 errors for discarding packets due to processing limits,
          draft-herbert-6man-icmp-limits , Tom Herbert, 20 min.
          
          IPv6 Router Advertisement IPv4 Unavailable Flag, draft-hinden-ipv4flag ,
          Bob Hinden, 20 min.
          
          New Individual Drafts
          
          IPv6 Performance Measurement with Alternate Marking Method,
          draft-fioccola-v6ops-ipv6-alt-mark , Giuseppe Fioccola, 10 min.
          
          Recommendation on Temporary IPv6 Interface Identifiers,
          draft-gont-6man-non-stable-iids , Fernando Gont, 5 min.
          
          Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6,
          draft-gont-6man-rfc4941bis , Fernando Gont, 5 min.
          
          Unified Identifier in IPv6 Segment Routing Networks,
          draft-mirsky-6man-unified-id-sr , Greg Mirsky, 5 min.
          
          -----------------------------------------------------------------------
          -----------------------------------------------------------------------
          
          Introduction, Agenda Bashing, Document Status, Chairs, 10 min.
          --------------------------------------------------------------
          
          Since last meeting RFC8319 has been published
          
          Several documents of interest in other WGs
          
          Eric Vyncke -> there is one more document in the Internet Area about IPv6
          provisioning domains (PvD)
          
          Suresh Krishnan -> another document in IPWAVE
          draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb
          
          
          IPv6 Node Requirements, draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis , Tim Chown, Tim
          Winters, 20 min.
          ---------------------------------------------------------------------
          
            Tim Chown presenting. Is a 6-7 years old document that need a
            refresh. 1 slide summary of changes since IETF100.
          
            If everybody is happy with the actual status, we can ask if we can
            advance it.
          
            Ole Trøan. Any observations considering this morning presentation at
            v6ops about router requirements. One difference being the router MUST
            support DHCPv6 while node SHOULD support DHCPv6 and Tim Chown is happy
            with this difference.  Tim Winters confirms the reference was removed
            so only informally mention.  [Note: reference was still in current
            version.]
          
            Barbara Stark confirms she likes the updates done.
          
            ACTION: Chairs will advance the document to IESG.
          
          
          IPv6 Segment Routing Header (SRH) draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header
          , Darren Dukes, 20 min.
          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          
            Darren Dukes presenting.
          
            Ron Bonica: this draft has been stable for a few years. There is
            another draft (about network programming) which is still moving and
            includes some shocking issues for this WG such as two RH in one
            packet. Either merge both drafts or last call them together. Ron and
            Darren disagree on the fact that SID could play a similar role to
            L3VPN.
          
            Suresh Krishnan: Do you have a plan to update the other document (on
            header insertion)? I don't want to hold this for ever, so I really want
            that to progress.
          
            Zafar Ali: drafts will be reviewed anyway in other WG
          
            Suresh Krishnan: That's what I've said.
          
            Ron Bonica: Question about issues with implementations?
          
            Presenter: if you're implementing now, let's have that discussion.
          
            Zhenbin Li from Huawei: we are also implementing SRv6.
          
            Suresh Krishnan: You can add a section about specific implementation
            details.
          
            Bob Hinden: There are no normative references in the document, they are
            all informational, that should be fixed and Darren agrees to fix this
            issue quickly.
          
            Darren what are the next steps. Bob is comfortable with starting the
            WGLC.
          
            ACTION:  Chairs will start working group last call.
          
          
          Multi-Vendor Interoperability Testing Results Update, Carsten
          Rossenhövel, 5 min.
          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          
            Nobody available to present on this, so skipped.
          
          
          ICMPv6 errors for discarding packets due to processing limits,
          draft-herbert-6man-icmp-limits , Tom Herbert, 20 min.
          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          
            Tom Herbert presenting about having a new ICMP error code to indicate
            that the middle box cannot handle the EH chain (too long, too many
            headers, ...).
          
            Darren Dukes: what to do when using ASIC because I cannot move the
            pointer to the next extension header which is beyond the ASIC
            visibility. I will send an email about this.
          
            Tom Herbert: We should point to something after that. The point
            is taken.
          
            Suresh Krishnan: Push that to the slow path.
          
            Bob Hinden: Skeptical that hosts to make any use of this. You've not
            convinced me about that.
          
            Tom Herbert: Extension headers aren't reliable, anything we do improves
            the situation. Feedback is part of that, instead of alternatives such
            as probing. I'm looking for flexibility using extension headers.
          
            Ole Trøan: What granularity do we want? What are the hosts doing with
            those ICMP codes? Is parameter error sufficient? The ecosystem to use
            this is quite big.
          
            Mikael Abrahamsson: Is there a way to tell the hosts to filter a
            specific extension header?
          
            Suresh Krishnan: Is that a parameter problem?
          
            Lorenzo Coliti: if you write code yes, but nobody wrote it yet.
          
            Mikael Abrahamsson: I'm not talking about this. If I've a firewall that
            want to filter something, do I've a way to signal that I'm going to
            filter that?
          
            Michael Ackermann: We don't have network management for that.
          
            Ron Bonica: could be useful to detect issue in tunnels
          
            Chairs do a hum to get a sense for adopting this document as a WG
            item. Excellent, seems room in favor of vote for adoption and will
            confirm in mailing list.
          
            ACTION: Chairs will confirm adoption on the mailing list.
          
          
          IPv6 Router Advertisement IPv4 Unavailable Flag, draft-hinden-ipv4flag,
          Bob Hinden, 20 min.
          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          
            Bob Hinden presenting. The I-D could prevent a dual-stack host to
            use IPv4
            even in the absence of IPv4 (could limit the amount of broadcast and
            the waste of battery, ...). Just a 4 flag in RA, default value 0
            means that IPv4 is present.
          
            Mikael Abrahamsson: You said "flag set administratively and not
            automagically"? If the upstream is PPPoE only (so the CPE does not know
            before PPPoE whether IPv4 is present)?
          
            Juliusz Chroboczek: Why is a flag and not an option? I see 3 values.
          
            Bob Hinden: What do you expect the host do to differently in that case?
          
            Juliusz Chroboczek: In the future when networks don't have IPv4
            anymore, should we really still use a 'useless' flag?
          
            Bob Hinden: Is good to remember history ... We could probably reclaims
            the flag. It is a very small problem, is not so bad.
          
            Lorenzo Coliti: We need to stop to disagree in the problem to find the
            right solution. We don't have a clear definition of what it means.
          
            Suresh Krishnan: I don't want to have sunset4 again. Let't other people
            talk ...
          
            Peter Stevens: what if there is IPv4 but only local in the LAN w/o IPv4
            router?
          
            Lee Howard: Flat set: I'm not the default gateway for IPv4. There is a
            useful clarification to be made in the document.
          
            Jen Linkova: We need to state if it means public IPv4 or also
            link-local.
          
            Bob Hinden: The goal is no IPv4 addresses at all.
          
            Barbara Stark: I think is useful and doesn't harm.
          
            David Schinazi: what kind of network would use this? Home network?
            Enterprise? IETF Network? I want to be able to still use the old
            IPv4-only printer over IPv4 link-local, use Bonjour ...
          
            Bob Hinden: Then you don't set the bit.
          
            Veronika McKillop: about to deploy IPv6-only network within Microsoft
            IT, so this I-D is a good idea and she wants this.
          
            Jen Linkova: I see the case for enterprise ...
          
            Suresh Krishnan: I personally support his work, but we need to see how
            to progress. Sunset4 is ideal but not many people left there ... Happy
            to keep doing it here.
          
            Friso Feenstra: what is someone is sending this RA with this flag on a
            fully functioning IPv4 network.
          
            Suresh Krishnan: Is a different draft, note that this work is only
            specifying: "I'm not an IPv4 router".
          
            Suresh Krishnan: why not removing all behaviour from the I-D? Up to the
            host to decide what to do
          
            Fernando Gont remotely:
          
            Jen Linkova: Is a good thing that you can completely turn off IPv4, is
            a security issue.
          
            The chair did a hum, there was majority for adoption, with a
            significant minority against. To be confirmed on the mailing list.
          
            ACTION: Chair will confim adoption on the mailing list.
          
          
          IPv6 Performance Measurement with Alternate Marking Method,
          draft-fioccola-v6ops-ipv6-alt-mark , Giuseppe Fioccola, 10 min.
          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          
            IPv6 Performance Measurement with Alternate Marking Method,
            draft-fioccola-v6ops-ipv6-alt-mark , Giuseppe Fioccola Giuseppe
            Fioccola presenting: using 1 or 2 bits in every packet (same marking
            for one period of time) within one managed network and checking at the
            end of the path. Of course, 2 bits need to be found IPv6 packets (dest
            address, in HbH or Destination Options, flow label, ...).
          
            Ole Trøan: Clarification question. Are you talking only about
            traversing packets in your network or also originated in your
            network. Do you talk also about header injection?
          
            Giuseppe Fioccola: Is an open question, but in principle both cases. We
            are experimenting only, we know there are some issues, we want to get
            some inputs.
          
            Lorenzo Coliti: I wonder if we should use the flow label that nobody is
            using anyway.
          
            Suresh Krishnan: The main issue is that somebody is using those bits
            for hashing in load balancing.
          
            Tim Chown: We have updated the flow label behavior and a node cannot
            change the flow label if is not 0... but some systems may set it.
          
            Suresh Krishnan: The problem is that the flow label need to be
            delivered as initially set.
          
            Lorenzo Coliti: Use TCP/UDP, so use the checksum.
          
            Giuseppe Fioccola: but is not IP and may be the SLA is on IP.
          
          
          Recommendation on Temporary IPv6 Interface Identifiers,
          draft-gont-6man-non-stable-iids , Fernando Gont, 5 min.
          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          
            Ole Trøan: No comments from the room at the time being, so continue
            with the next document, as they are related.
          
          
          Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6,
          draft-gont-6man-rfc4941bis , Fernando Gont, 5 min.
          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          
            Dave ?: Needs to specify "unprobably"
          
            Fernando Gont: I don't expect you remember the previous values.
          
            Tim Chown: You need to define the property of those addresses. Not
            predictable?
          
            Lorenzo Coliti: Base it in the algorithm from the previous RFC is a
            bad idea because it is predictable once the secret is known. It should
            be randomized so it is useful for privacy.
          
            Bob Hinden: Looking at the diff is very messy to find the changes.  It
            would have been better if a -00 draft has been a base line from the
            original RFC.  Then -01 can have the changes.
          
            Suresh Krishnan: The issue are the RFC editor edits, this draft was
            based on Suresh's XML, not the final output from the RFC Editor.  The
            RFC Editor and AUTH48 changes were lost.
          
            Lorenzo Coliti: Let's delete the text for algorithms and just say it
            should be random.
          
            [After the session, the chairs request that the author start with a new
            filename using the RFC Editor XML to create a new baseline.]
          
          
          Unified Identifier in IPv6 Segment Routing Networks,
          draft-mirsky-6man-unified-id-sr , Greg Mirsky, 5 min.
          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          
            Ole Trøan: We have time for one question. Have you presented in SPRING?
          
            Greg Mirsky: They have a too tight agenda. Agree they should be aware
            of it.
          
            Darren Dukes: I do not see this I-D being applicable to any SPRING
            use-case.
          
          
          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Meeting Adjourned
          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          
          



Generated from PyHt script /wg/6man/minutes.pyht Latest update: 24 Oct 2012 16:51 GMT -